Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1. Introduction
Spatial inequalities exist at all levels of disaggregation. However, the
nature and extent of these inequalities vary with choice of indicator
and geographical space over which comparisons are made. A given
state may perform extremely well on all indicators but there may be
districts within that state that are among the most deprived in the
country. Or a state may have very high levels of attainment on economic
development and health and very low levels of attainment on education
and gender parameters.
No single indicator can capture the complexities of development.
Therefore, indices are generally estimated by aggregating performance
with regard to several indicators. This requires the identification of
variables to be included in the index, the range to be used for scaling
and weights to be allocated to the different variables. Decisions in this
regard tend to be arbitrary and driven by availability of data. Changes in
any of these factors can lead to very different results. In addition there
is the issue of choice of method to be used in estimating the index.
1 Time and resources provided by IIPA and CPRC and especially the valuable suggestions made
by Prof. K.L. Krishna, Dr. Pronab Sen, Dr. P.L. Sanjeev Reddy, Dr. N.C.B. Nath, Dr. Rohini
Nayyar, Dr. Amita Shah, Dr. Rangacharyulu, Dr. Suryanarayana, Prof. D.C. Sah and other
participants who attended the presentation of an earlier version of this paper at the Research
Design Workshop for Exploring Appropriate Solutions to Chronic Poverty held at IIPA on
15th and 16th May, 2002 are gratefully acknowledged. Comments by Ramakrushna Panigrahi
and Sashi Sivramkrishna are also gratefully acknowledged.
Aasha Kapur Mehta 340
Multidimensional Poverty
The poor suffer deprivation in multiple ways: low levels of income,
illiteracy, relatively high levels of mortality, poor infrastructure, lack
of voice and poor access to resources such as credit, land, water, and
forests. Human and gender development indices improve on income-
based indicators as measures of well being, by moving beyond income
centered approaches, to measuring development and incorporating
capabilities such as being healthy or literate into the development index.
Comparing the ranks of 15 large states on the basis of population
below the poverty line estimated by the Planning Commission with
values of the human development index shows that income based
poverty incidence and performance on human development indicators
seem to follow a similar pattern in most cases. The exceptions in this
regard are Andhra, Kerala, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra
(See table 2). Low attainments on literacy result in the rank for Andhra
Table 2: State Rankings: HDI and Population below the Poverty Line
Rank Ranks of states based Ranks estimated Rank estimated Difference in
on Population for HDI in 1991 for HDI in 2001 HDI Rank
below poverty between 1991
line in 1993-94 and 2001
1 Punjab Kerala Kerala 0
2 Andhra Pradesh Punjab Punjab 0
3 Gujarat Tamil Nadu Tamil Nadu 0
4 Haryana Maharashtra Maharashtra 0
5 Kerala Haryana Haryana 0
6 Rajasthan Gujarat Gujarat 0
7 Karnataka Karnataka Karnataka 0
8 Tamil Nadu West Bengal West Bengal 0
9 West Bengal Andhra Rajasthan +2
10 Maharashtra Assam Andhra -1
11 Uttar Pradesh Rajasthan Orissa +1
12 Assam Orissa MadhyaPradesh +1
13 Madhya Pradesh MadhyaPradesh Uttar Pradesh +1
14 Orissa Uttar Pradesh Assam -4
15 Bihar Bihar Bihar 0
Source: Planning Commission Press Release, March, 1997 and Planning Commission, National
Human Development Report, (2002).
Aasha Kapur Mehta 342
Bihar Central 24.66 54.03 72.28 22.53 39.77 6.53 7.74 18.12
Bihar Northern 27.62 58.68 76.05 15.71 30.39 3.88 3.98 22.68
Bihar Southern 31.57 62.44 69.8 16.31 32.66 7.65 3.65 9.17
Madhya P. Central 21.78 50.13 127.77 21.33 38.65 37.1 4.45 11.14
Madhya P. South 22.37 46.36 123 27.27 42.24 36.73 3.5 13.02
Madhya P. S Western 42.24 68.2 133.21 21.96 35.77 48.07 5.41 14.72
Maharashtra Inl Central 28.91 50.02 60.23 27.5 45.74 48.63 2.85 25.51
Maharashtra Inl Eastern 20.06 49.08 93.38 47.17 59.86 57.31 7.87 23.46
Orissa Southern 34.08 69.02 123.25 11.01 23.56 6.64 2.77 11.83
Uttar P. Central 26.79 50.2 98.43 18.95 34.92 5.74 3.42 17.82
Uttar P. Eastern 23.2 48.6 92.33 15.12 35.33 10.32 3.26 13.98
Uttar P. Southern 39.7 66.74 101.54 16.63 36.34 7.47 3.71 23.83
Max 1.67 7.55 35.39 87.96 91.06 85.88 48.69 99.11
Min 42.24 69.02 135.66 9.37 23.56 3.88 2.11 9.17
344
Urban % severely % poor Child Female Total Electricity Toilet P&T
345
Data are from the Census (1991), Bhalla and Singh (2001) and
CMIE (2000).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Kalahandi Bahraich Bahraich Kalahandi Bahraich Bahraich Kalahandi Bahraich Bahraich
Bahraich Damoh Kishanganj Bahraich Damoh Budaun Bahraich Damoh Shahdol
Budaun Shahdol Shahdol Budaun Shahdol Kishanganj Damoh Shahdol Damoh
Damoh Kalahandi Budaun Damoh Kalahandi Shahdol Budaun Barmer Kishanganj
Barmer Barmer Damoh Kishanganj Barmer Damoh Barmer Kalahandi Barmer
Shahdol Budaun Kalahandi Barmer Budaun Kalahandi Shahdol Kishanganj Budaun
Kishanganj Kishanganj Barmer Shahdol Kishanganj Barmer Kishanganj Budaun Kalahandi
Note: Indices 1, 4 and 7 are based on 3 variables (an average of female literacy and schooling, infant mortality and agricultural productivity).
Indices 2, 5 and 8 are based on 4 variables (an average of female literacy and schooling, infant mortality, agricultural productivity and
infrastructure).
Indices 3, 6 and 9 are based on 4 variables (an average of literacy and schooling, infant mortality, agricultural productivity and infrastructure).
Chronic Poverty in India
Aasha Kapur Mehta 350
below the poverty line. (see tables 5 and 6). Kalahandi has very
low levels of literacy and an extremely high level of infant mortality
of 137.
z All the regions of Bihar have relatively high levels of poverty.
However, Kishanganj in Northern Bihar is additionally one of the
7 districts with the most multidimensional deprivation. While
poverty incidence at 62 per cent is higher in Southern Bihar (now
Jharkhand) compared with 58 per cent in Northern Bihar, rural
areas of both are included among the seven regions that have the
highest levels of income poverty. The female literacy rate in
Kishanganj is 10 per cent and infant mortality close to the highest
in Bihar at 113.
z The South west region of Madhya Pradesh has the second highest
proportion of the rural population in poverty and severe poverty
in India (68 per cent) and has the fifth highest level of urban
poverty. However, none of the districts of this region are among
the 7 most multidimensionally deprived.
z The only other part of Madhya Pradesh that is included among the
poorest seven regions of India is urban Central Madhya Pradesh.
Table 5: Population in poverty and severe poverty in regions to which
7 most deprived districts belong
Districts Rural Rural Urban Urban
State Region % popu- % popu- % popu- % popu
lation lation lation lation
poor severely poor severely
poor poor
Orissa Southern Kalahandi 69.02 34.08 45.64 33.53
Bihar Northern Kishanganj 58.68 27.62 49.37 21.68
Madhya Pradesh Central Damoh 50.13 21.78 53.68 32.93
Madhya Pradesh Vindhya Shahdol 36.71 13.8 50.45 24.32
Uttar Pradesh Eastern Bahraich 48.6 23.2 38.6 18.48
Uttar Pradesh Western Budaun 29.59 10.24 31.03 14.37
Rajasthan Western Barmer 25.48 5.84 23.68 7.43
Source: Based on K.L. Datta and Savita Sharma, Level of Living in India, Planning
Commission, 2000.
351 Chronic Poverty in India
Table 6: 7 Regions with the largest percentage of population
in poverty and severe poverty in India
Rural Poor Very
Poor
Orissa Southern 69.02 Madhya Pradesh South Western 42.24
Madhya Pradesh South Western 68.2 Uttar Pradesh Southern 39.7
Uttar Pradesh Southern 66.74 Orissa Southern 34.08
Bihar Southern 62.44 Bihar Southern 31.57
West Bengal Himalayan 58.73 Maharashtra Inland Central 28.91
Bihar Northern 58.68 Bihar Northern 27.62
Bihar Central 54.03 Uttar Pradesh Central 26.79
Urban Poor Very
Poor
Uttar Pradesh Southern 72.52 Maharashtra Inland Central 42.62
Maharashtra Inland Central 60.13 Maharashtra Inland Eastern 38.99
Maharashtra Inland Eastern 59.32 Uttar Pradesh Southern 37.54
Karnataka Inland Northern 57.63 Madhya Pradesh South Western 36.6
Madhya Pradesh South Western 57.14 Karnataka Inland Northern 36.49
Maharashtra Inland Northern 56.94 Orissa Southern 33.53
Madhya Pradesh Central 53.68 Madhya Pradesh Central 32.93
Source: Based on K.L. Datta and Savita Sharma, Level of Living in India, Planning Commission,
2000.
However, two districts, Damoh in Central MP and Shahdol in
Vindhya, are among the most multidimensionally deprived districts
in India. With infant mortality rates at 166 in Damoh and 137 in
Shahdol, extreme health deprivation exists in these districts.
z Rajasthan does relatively well in income poverty terms and less
well on multidimensional criteria. Barmer in Western Rajasthan is
one of the 7 most multidimensionally deprived districts, with a
female literacy rate of 7.7 per cent , extremely low levels of
agricultural productivity and an infant mortality rate of 99.
z While southern UP is among the poorest regions in the country,
none of the districts in this region gets included in the 7 most
multidimensionally deprived districts of India. However, Bahraich
(female literacy 10 per cent and infant mortality rate 138) in Eastern
Aasha Kapur Mehta 352
5. Conclusions
Spatial estimates at various levels of disaggregation reflect convergence
of deprivation in multiple dimensions or multidimensional poverty.
Those in poverty are unevenly distributed across India with
concentration of poverty in some states. Variables reflecting
multidimensional deprivation, such as incidence of child mortality,
literacy, access to infrastructure such as electricity, toilet facilities and
postal and telegraphic communications are estimated to be several
times worse in regions with high incidence of poverty relative to those
in the best performing region.
Table 7: Most deprived 50 to 60 districts out of 379 districts
353
Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
State
Assam Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri Dhubri
Bihar Araria Araria Araria Araria Araria Araria Araria Araria Araria
Bihar Deoghar Deoghar Deoghar Kishanganj Deoghar Deoghar
Bihar Katihar
Bihar Kishanganj Kishanganj Kishanganj Kishanganj Kishanganj Kishanganj Kishanganj Kishanganj
Bihar Palamu Palamu Palamu Palamu Palamu Palamu Palamu Palamu Palamu
Bihar Purnia Purnia Purnia Purnia
Bihar Sahibganj Sahibganj Sahibganj Sahibganj Sahibganj Sahibganj
Bihar Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi Sitamarhi
MP Bastar Bastar Bastar Bastar Bastar Bastar Bastar Bastar Bastar
MP Betul Betul Betul Betul Betul Betul Betul Betul Betul
MP Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur Chhattarpur
MP Damoh Damoh Damoh Damoh Damoh Damoh Damoh Damoh Damoh
MP Datia Datia Datia
MP Dhar
MP East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar East Nimar
MP Guna Guna Guna Guna Guna Guna Guna Guna Guna
MP Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua Jhabua
Contd. Next Page.....
Chronic Poverty in India
Contd. Previous Page.....
MP Mandla Mandla Mandla Mandla Mandla Mandla Mandla Mandla Mandla
MP Panna Panna Panna Panna Panna Panna Panna Panna Panna
MP Raisen Raisen Raisen Raisen Raisen Raisen Raisen Raisen Raisen
MP Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh Rajgarh
Aasha Kapur Mehta
Orissa Koraput Koraput Koraput Koraput Koraput Koraput Koraput Koraput Koraput
Orissa Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani Phulbani
Rajasthan Banswara Banswara Banswara Banswara Banswara Banswara Banswara Banswara Banswara
Rajasthan Barmer Barmer Barmer Barmer Barmer Barmer Barmer Barmer Barmer
Rajasthan Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara Bhilwara
Rajasthan Dholpur Dholpur
Rajasthan Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur Dungarpur
Rajasthan Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer Jaisalmer
Rajasthan Jalor Jalor Jalor Jalor Jalor Jalor Jalor Jalor Jalor
Rajasthan Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar Jhalawar
Rajasthan Nagaur Nagaur Nagaur Nagaur Nagaur Nagaur Nagaur Nagaur
Rajasthan Pali Pali Pali Pali Pali Pali Pali Pali Pali
Rajasthan Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi Sirohi
Rajasthan Tonk Tonk Tonk Tonk Tonk Tonk Tonk Tonk Tonk
UP Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich Bahraich
UP Banda Banda Banda Banda Banda Banda Banda Banda Banda
UP Basti Basti Basti Basti Basti Basti Basti Basti Basti
UP Budaun Budaun Budaun Budaun Budaun Budaun Budaun Budaun Budaun
UP Gonda Gonda Gonda Gonda Gonda Gonda Gonda Gonda Gonda
UP Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi Hardoi
Contd. Next Page.....
Chronic Poverty in India
Contd. Previous Page.....
UP Lalitpur Lalitpur Lalitpur Lalitpur Lalitpur Lalitpur Lalitpur Lalitpur
UP Shahjahan- Shahjahan- Shahjahan- Shahjahan- Shahjahan-
pur pur pur pur pur
UP Siddrath- Siddrath- Siddrath- Siddrath- Siddrath-
Aasha Kapur Mehta
References
Agarwal, Bina 1997. Gender, Environment, and Poverty Interlinks: Regional Variations and
Temporal Shifts in Rural India, 1971-91. World Development, Vol. 25, No.1, 23-52.
Bhalla, G. S. and Singh, Gurmail 2001. Indian Agriculture: Four Decades of Development. New
Delhi: Sage.
Census of India 1991. State District Profile. Registrar General of India.
Aasha Kapur Mehta 358
CMIE (Centre For Monitoring Indian Economy) 2000. Profiles Of Districts. CMIE Private
Limited, Economic Intelligence Service. Mumbai, October.
Datt, Gaurav and Ravallion, Martin 1996. India’s checkered History in Fight Against Poverty:
Are There Lessons for the Future? Economic and Political Weekly, Special Number.
Ghosh, P. K., Kundu, Amitabh and Shariff, Abusaleh 2002. Indexing Human Development in
India: Indicators, Scaling and Composition. National Council of Applied Economic Research,
Working Paper Series No. 83.
Government of India 1997. Report of the Committee To Identify 100 Most Backward and Poorest
District in the Country. Ministry of Rural Areas and Employment.
Haq, Mahbub ul 1996. Human Development Paradigm for South Asia. Mainstream.
Haan, Arjan de and Lipton, Michael 1998. Poverty in Emerging Asia: Progress,
Setbacks and Log-jams. Asian Development Review, Vol.16, No.2.
Krishnan, T. N. 2000. The Route To Social Development In Kerala: Social Intermediation And
Public Action. In Development With A Human Face: Experiences In Social Achievement And Economic
Growth, edited by S. Mehrotra and R. Jolly, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Kurian, N. J. 2000. Widening Regional Disparities in India: Some Indicators. Economic and
Political Weekly.
Mahanty, Ghanshyam 2000. Human Development in Andhra Pradesh: A District Level Analysis.
The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Vol. 43, No. 2.
Mehta, Aasha Kapur and Shah, Amita 2001. Chronic Poverty in India: Overview Study. CPRC
Working Paper No. 7, University of Manchester.
Mehta, Kapur Aasha 1996. Recasting Indices for Developing Countries: A Gender Empowerment
Measure. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 31, No. 43.
Mehta, Aasha Kapur and Shah, Amita 2003. Chronic Poverty in India: Incidence, Causes and
Policies. World Development, Vol. 31, No. 3.
Panigrahi, Ramakrushna and Sivaramakrishna, Sashi 2002. An Adjusted Human Development
Index: Robust Country Rankings with respect to choice of fixed maximum and minimum
indicator values. Journal of Human Development, Vol. 3, No. 2.
Ravallion, M. 1996. Issues In Measuring And Modeling Poverty. The Economic Journal, 106,
1328-1343.
Rajakutty, S., Acharya, S. and Haque, T. 1999. India’s Rural Development Report 1999:
Regional Disparities In Development And Poverty. National Institute Of Rural Development
(NIRD), Hyderabad.
Rani, Geetha P. 1999. Human Development Index in India: A District Profile, Vol. 41, No.1, 9-30.
Rao, H. and Babu, M. Devendra 1996. Intra-Regional Disparities In Hyderabad-Karnataka
Region: An Analysis. In Regional Development: Problems And Policy Measures, A. Aziz and S.
Krishna, New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.
Sivaramakrishna, Sashi and Panigrahi, Ramakrushna. Articulating Uneven Regional
Development for Micro and Macro Planning. Journal of Human Development (forthcoming).
Shivkumar, A. K. 1994. Human Development Index For Indian States. Economic And Political
Weekly, Vol. 36.
UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) 1999. Human Development Report 1999.
New York: Oxford University Press.
359 Chronic Poverty in India
Vani, B. P. and Vyasulu, Vinod 1997. Development and Deprivation in Karnataka: A District-
Level Study. Economic and Political Weekly.
Endnotes
1
1. In the case of the UNDP three indicator (life expectancy at birth, education and income)
based calculations:
i) let
l = Lb – Lk, where Lb is the maximum actual LEB index value, say, of country b, and Lk
is the minimum actual LEB index value, say, of country k
e = Em – En, where Em is the maximum actual EDN index value, say, of country m, and
En is the minimum actual EDN index value, say, of country n
g= Gp – Gq where Gp is the maximum actual GDP index value, say, of country p, and Gq
is the minimum actual GDP index value, say, of country q.
ii) Take the minimum of (1,e and g). Let us suppose that 1 <e and 1<g (i.e. 1 is the minimum
or least value among 1,e and g).
iii) Then let e* = 1/e and g* = 1/g.
iv) Adjust Lj, Ej and Gj as follows.
Since 1 is minimum, let:
aLj = Lj for all j
aEj = e*Ej for all j
aGj = g*Gj for all j
v) aHDIj = (aLj + aEj + aGj)/3
vi) Choose maxj (aHDIj) and HDIj)
vii) Let v= (HDIj)/maxj(aHDIj)
viii) Let AHDIj = v(aHDIj)
ix) Rank countries according to AHDI with higher values getting a better rank.